mh17skeptic

4 ms·

1.
by mh17skeptic 8y ago
> Remember: firing the rocket must have been done by the army, not by some NSA like agency. That increases the risk of leaks. Sure. But by how much? Ukrainians were actively moving their BUK launchers around at the time, so the movement
2.
by mh17skeptic 8y ago
I just read the fresh news about Malaysian minister not convinced with the evidence [1] and have to admit you can be right here. We'll see what happens next, but it doesn't seem entirely impossible that this bunch of officials is
3.
by mh17skeptic 8y ago
Why not. That probably makes the team even more international. I even heard North Korea has quite a bit of expertise in missiles.
4.
by mh17skeptic 8y ago
So, perceived number and diversity of the people involved in the hypothetical misinformation operation seems to be key. 1) The part about fake evidence seems to be firmly within reach of Ukrainian secret service: after all, the original art
5.
by mh17skeptic 8y ago
Imagine a similar incident in, say, Syria, investigated by an international team lead by Russians with some involvement of Belarus and Iran. Let's say they publish a report blaming US-supported rebels. Would you lend the same credence
6.
by mh17skeptic 8y ago
First of all, thanks for a substantive reply. I wasn't sure I would get any. And yes, the case is widely considered rather clear cut — this is exactly why I'm horrified and trying to understand it better. - bragged about it in so
7.
by mh17skeptic 8y ago
Of course there's dozens of articles there. What makes you think this source is credible? If a passenger aircraft was supposedly shot down with a surface-to-air missile over, for example, Argentina, would you expect an international in